Summer transfer rumours, speculation and out-and-out b*ll*cks.

[Toronto Villa]

I think the point that was being made was that Doug would have taken the first offer on the table, at least this lot don't roll over and take whatever is on offer.

They still take the money, though. That's the problem.

So what exactly would you have done differently?

I wouldn't sell Downing, which is what this whole debate is about.

I'd also not have made a managerial appointment that has zero ambition written all over it, I'd have made one that would galvanise the club, rather than mark it out as one which has given up trying, which in itself makes players more likely to want to leave.

I can't change any of that, but as a fan, I can't see why on earth even the mst conformist of our fans would find any satisfaction in the fact we are so good at flogging our best players.

It's not about satisfaction. It's about knowing that our board have stated publicly that they want to keep our best players but in the event that the players have made it clear they want to go, the board have said that's it's on our terms. You seem to be missing/ignoring that bit every time. Yes, off course we could have kept all of the players that we've lost but no club turns down that kind of money. It would have financially irresponsible and especially at a time where our wages and expenses were spiralling out of control.

[pauliewalnuts]

What has happened is we've been turned down by the manager of Wgan Athletic, appointed a manager who has been relegated in two of the three seasons he has managed in this league, and we've sold - whatever the reason - another very good player, whilst constantly sending out signals about fiscal constraint.

Now, imagine sitting down with Downing and his agent and trying to pin that out as us being a club with ambitions.

The fans don't swallow it, so why should the players? This time next season, it will be Darren Bent,and if we are losing players to Liverpool now, we will probably be losing them to Newcastle by then.

[Mazrim]

Hands up, who's in the mood for bindippers coming here and telling us what our players are worth and what their piss taking club will or will not pay?
Oh yes, delightful.

It's the curious logic of it all that I find most enjoyable.
 
Overpaid. But 'on their terms.'  Confused, much?

Downing is not the equivalent of Henderson and Carroll which is why Liverpool won't overpay.

I agree with the first part, which is why the second part makes no sense.  Absolutely 100% spot on that Downing isn't the equivalent of Henderson or Carroll.  He's infinitely better - to date. As far as potential/ resale value goes too, It's not as if he's on his last legs either, with no room for improvement. He's 26.

Liverpool's strategy is perfectly logical. It doesn't help the debate to suggest otherwise simply because you aren't in favour of it.

Clearly, Liverpool are valuing potential higher than they are proven ability. As Downing is also infinitely better than Albrighton, presumably you'd value the youngster at a lot less too?

Downing isnt infinitely better than Albrighton. What are you going on about?

And a big fucking "lol" to a strategy of paying what may well be £55m on Carroll and Henderson being "perfectly logical".
Im all for investing in youth but... wow.

Anyway, the bottom line is, if you want an England player and a proven premier league performer there is a premium. It doesnt change because Aston Villa own his registration.

[pauliewalnuts]

Two weeks ago, McLeish told the fans that it would take an absurd, 50m style offer for us to sell Downing.

Let's see just what kind of figure we deem too much to turn down. I reckon it won't be even half of that.

[hilts_coolerking]

And a big fucking "lol" to a strategy of paying what may well be £55m on Carroll and Henderson being "perfectly logical".

They did get £50M for Torres though.  And should they ever decide to sell Carroll and Henderson, they'll get a fair chunk of that money back.

[KevinGage]

Hands up, who's in the mood for bindippers coming here and telling us what our players are worth and what their piss taking club will or will not pay?
Oh yes, delightful.

It's the curious logic of it all that I find most enjoyable.
 
Overpaid. But 'on their terms.'  Confused, much?

Downing is not the equivalent of Henderson and Carroll which is why Liverpool won't overpay.

I agree with the first part, which is why the second part makes no sense.  Absolutely 100% spot on that Downing isn't the equivalent of Henderson or Carroll.  He's infinitely better - to date. As far as potential/ resale value goes too, It's not as if he's on his last legs either, with no room for improvement. He's 26.

Liverpool's strategy is perfectly logical. It doesn't help the debate to suggest otherwise simply because you aren't in favour of it.

Clearly, Liverpool are valuing potential higher than they are proven ability. As Downing is also infinitely better than Albrighton, presumably you'd value the youngster at a lot less too?

At this point in time, yes.

Excellent delivery from wide, and shows promise. But he's still raw. Though I think it unlikely, he could yet go the way of Peter Whittingham and a few others.  Downing won't. He's an international, at the top of his game and was our player of the year last year. Yet he's still young enough to improve further.

You seem to speak with the assurance or authority that you are somehow instep with Liverpool's buying strategy. Does Comolli have you on speed dial if he's ever unsure about the merits of a prospective transfer?

Though on this one, I do actually hope you're both singing from the same hymn sheet. If your top brass value him to the extent that you do - ie less than a rookie like Henderson- that's hopefully where the matter ends.

[Mazrim]

Two weeks ago, McLeish told the fans that it would take an absurd, 50m style offer for us to sell Downing.

Let's see just what kind of figure we deem too much to turn down. I reckon it won't be even half of that.

I said before, if he wants out, £20m is acceptable and no less AND we get the replacement first.
I dont actually give a flying fuck about the player. The feeling is obviously mutual.

[Greg N'Ash]

i think people need to re-evalutate where the club is going with a bit of realism. If Liverpool for example had let Hodgson go and appointed AM, then let 4 first team players go this summer would anyone be surprised if Gerrard left? would anyone neutral think they were on the up? Whatever the reality is, we've given every impression of downsizing and being on the way down. It brings me back to the General's frankly ludicrous suggestion that who you appoint as manager has no bearing on how ambitious the club is. if we'd appointed FSW or kept GH and spent 20 odd million by now, would Downing be more or less likely to stay?


We give off all the signs of being a club in decline so it becomes a self-fullfilling prophecuy and we become a club in decline.

[hilts_coolerking]

It's not about satisfaction. It's about knowing that our board have stated publicly that they want to keep our best players but in the event that the players have made it clear they want to go, the board have said that's it's on our terms. You seem to be missing/ignoring that bit every time. Yes, off course we could have kept all of the players that we've lost but no club turns down that kind of money. It would have financially irresponsible and especially at a time where our wages and expenses were spiralling out of control.

So we've weakened the team on our own terms.  Three, possibly four times.  Rah rah.

[hilts_coolerking]

It brings me back to the General's frankly ludicrous suggestion that who you appoint as manager has no bearing on how ambitious the club is.

Did he really say that?  Christ almighty.

[Mazrim]

And a big fucking "lol" to a strategy of paying what may well be £55m on Carroll and Henderson being "perfectly logical".

They did get £50M for Torres though.  And should they ever decide to sell Carroll and Henderson, they'll get a fair chunk of that money back.

Only if they end up being any good.

[Steve R]

I'd much rather we were buying players like Young and Milner and selling on at 100% markup 3 years later than throwing money at wasters who only make you wonder how many years free ride they have left on their contracts.

I don't mind Barry, Milner, Young and Downing being sold on. It's what we do with the money that worries me.

We didn't suffer for long after the likes of Gray, Gidman and Deehan buggered off. The manager at the time was good enough to go out and build a better team.

That's the challenge for McLeish. Don't piss a penny out of the window.

Paradoxically, selling our best players is arguably an integral part of making up the gap on the top 4. We have to do to them what Wigan do to the bottom three.

I can't see us doing it any other way.

[hilts_coolerking]

Only if they end up being any good.

Indeed.  But I thought you were one of Carroll's biggest champions.

[Mazrim]

It brings me back to the General's frankly ludicrous suggestion that who you appoint as manager has no bearing on how ambitious the club is.

Did he really say that?  Christ almighty.

Yes I'm affraid so. It was a facepalm moment.

[TheSandman]

Was this in that highly dubious Bookface rant?